AuthorTopic: VECTORLINUX 7.0 RC2 Bug Reports (Read 108185 times)

If you're not willing to configure your linux environment, why are you using linux in the first place?

1. difference between and distinction of "willing" versus "obliged";

2. what does "configuration" have to do with a desire to avoid M$/apple? Nothing, in my opinion, i.e. non-sequitur. In other words, MOE, folks don't use Linux, because it is readily configurable. They use it because it requires LESS configuration than M$.

3. One would not be so vehemently opposed to changing from two to one click if it were obvious that two clicks is more logical, more reasonable, and more flexible, than single click. Unfortunately, the converse is true. You will discover this in another few decades, when arthritis hits you........

Linux is supposed to be:

logical,

user friendly,

intuitive.

MOE, are the steps neccessary, for the user to change from two clicks to a single click, intuitive,?

I have no idea how to go about it. One reason why I have no idea how to accomplish this task, is because NONE of the other linux distros which I regularly use, require the user to click twice. They all work, without exception, on a single click.

NO, I agree with you, it is not "hard", to follow these steps, but those steps are NOT OBVIOUS.

Now that you have taught me how to make the change, (and it was SIMPLE, I went to another computer, running XFCE, and found the sequence, just as you set forth....), I will relax about the fact that VECTOR enables by default two clicks, rather than one. However, I do think, in view of the relative obscurity of this alteration, and the relative facility associated with carrying it out, that VECTOR ought to use single click as default. I certainly insist that the behaviour of Apple and M$ ought not provide justification for defining VECTOR's default configuration.

The bug, which I reported, has not yet been addressed. Maybe, it is not at all a bug, but simply my inability to install VECTOR, correctly. I described it as a bug, and reported it here, because to my way of thinking, it is a bug. If I have erred, please feel free to ignore my assertion. I cannot login, post installation, for there is no transport to sda4. The computer just sits there.

*****************b.If your purpose is to "a. download distro; b. install distro; c. test distro" then you should use the install version, not live version.

What's the difference? How would one know that distinction? What then, is the purpose of the "live" version. Context: All of the other linux distros which I have installed from live editions, work fine.....Do you mean that I have not been installing Vector 7, all these different attempts have been for naught, because I am using a "live" cdrom, instead of an "install" cdrom???

a) I assume you mean the inability to install lilo to sda4 from the Live CD's installer. If the option is not offered then it's a lack of functionality rather than a bug. The install version should allow you to install lilo to the partition rather than mbr (see below for install version vs live version).

b) The "Install" vs "Live" issue is messy and incongruent. The difference is the install version sole purpose is to install VL to your hard drive - no getting to see it work beforehand. The Live version sole purpose is to allow a user to see and work with VL without having to install it to the hard drive. In every previous release of VL, the live version did not become available until after the install version was final. IMO, it's unfortunate that the live and install versions are being released and announced in the same thread. Live CDs tend to have random artifacts related to making them "Live", compounded with a testing release cycle and same-announcement threads, it makes for an unnecessarily messy situation as it relates to bug reports. (Add in the fact that Pita is testing/reporting on VL7 Light versions in this thread, and we really start to get messy.)

As you indicate, one cannot know the distinction unless they are familiar with the difference between Install and Live distros, even then you have to throw in the fact that VL Live CD may work differently that other distros live releases (again, unfortunate they are on same release cycle and same release announcement).

Theoretically, you HAVE been installing VL7 with the Live CD, it's just that you've been getting a tailored/altered/reduced version of the installer that comes with the Live version. Testing you've done in the past (6+ months ago and prior) have almost exclusively been for non-live versions; it just seems that it's THIS release cycle that has combined releases. On the plus side, you've always had more troubles installing previous versions than you've had this time with the exception of lilo. It would be interesting for you to try installing the most recent Install version to see if you have more control over lilo and other aspects. Keep in mind that the graphical (GUI) installer may not work on your system if the past is any kind of indication of this time around, which may oblige (i.e. force) you to use the text (TUI) installer found on the same CD (accessed by typing 'install' at the first "boot:" prompt), and, again, the GUI and TUI installers don't exactly match up in terms of functionality and options (sigh, rolleyes) - three installers and none work the same (Live, GUI, TUI). Below is the link for the VL7 RC2 Install version and md5 (if needed):http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/veclinux-7.0/iso-release/VL7.0-STD-RC2.isohttp://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/veclinux-7.0/iso-release/VL7.0-STD-RC2.md5sum.txt

Yes, as you noted, I do perceive a significant improvement in the installer, apart from the unfortunate final step, which, as you have now explained, is not a bug, but rather a decision to deny users of the "live" version, an opportunity to install Vector 7 to sda4 partition on the SATA drive.

OK, mystery cleared up. I will try to post my results again, this weekend, after I reinstall, from the new cdrom.;.....Thanks again, for your patience.....

My desktop has no icons. In fact I hate them.Very simple solution. Fluxbox with xfce4/gnome-panel or remove them in ~/Desktop.

Another simple solution--just don't put icons on the XFce desktop and remove the ones that are there. I think it now gives the option to get rid of the ones you couldn't remove in earlier versions of XFce.--GrannyGeek

Live CDs tend to have random artifacts related to making them "Live", compounded with a testing release cycle and same-announcement threads, it makes for an unnecessarily messy situation as it relates to bug reports. (Add in the fact that Pita is testing/reporting on VL7 Light versions in this thread, and we really start to get messy.)

Live CDs tend to have random artifacts related to making them "Live", compounded with a testing release cycle and same-announcement threads, it makes for an unnecessarily messy situation as it relates to bug reports. (Add in the fact that Pita is testing/reporting on VL7 Light versions in this thread, and we really start to get messy.)

I didn't mean to single you out in a negative way, just use your 'Live-Light' testing as an example of how this thread is a collection bucket for bugs from 2-3 different releases (or subreleases). I actually wonder if you have tested a true 'Light' version (live or not), or if the term 'light' has just accidentally slipped into the topic of your posts. Your post indicates you have tested 'VECTORLINUX 7.0 LIGHT LIVE RC2' or 'VL7-LIVE-LIGHT-RC2' yet I never saw a release announcement for a 'Light' version - then again it wouldn't surprise me if I missed the announcement; I've been known to miss a lot

Hey guys, downloaded and installed RC2 in a virtual machine. Let me just say wow, can't wait to try it on my laptop!

I've had a terrible time trying to install VL7 on virtual machine (Virtualbox 4.0.10) - VB's fault not VL. VB's been pegging one of my cores at 100% and running about 1/10 speed. I think the install took about 2 hours, of course I just walked away and came back hours later. After finishing the install I rebooted the system and the time it took to get from boot to selecting my OS from grub took about 5 minutes. Needless to say, I didn't get any testing done. I tried various fixes for VB (dummy machine, cpu affinity, downgrading, etc) but none worked. As a test to see if VB was going to always be problematic on my system I installed Salix Flux 13.37 and it worked just fine - quite fast in fact. I'm not sure why the VB-VL7 combo hasn't worked out for me but it's frustrating; I guess real hardware just can't be beat as a test medium

Live CDs tend to have random artifacts related to making them "Live", compounded with a testing release cycle and same-announcement threads, it makes for an unnecessarily messy situation as it relates to bug reports. (Add in the fact that Pita is testing/reporting on VL7 Light versions in this thread, and we really start to get messy.)

I actually wonder if you have tested a true 'Light' version (live or not), or if the term 'light' has just accidentally slipped into the topic of your posts. Your post indicates you have tested 'VECTORLINUX 7.0 LIGHT LIVE RC2' or 'VL7-LIVE-LIGHT-RC2' yet I never saw a release announcement for a 'Light' version - then again it wouldn't surprise me if I missed the announcement; I've been known to miss a lot

I was wondering the same thing about Pita's VL7 Light Live. I'm sure I didn't miss an announcement. So where did Pita find this elusive VL7 *LIGHT* Live? I don't scour through the ISO releases directory online, so I thought it might be in there but was too uninterested to check. However, a release candidate 2 for VL7 *LIGHT* Live would have had no testing by the community since it was never announced and none of the usual testers have tried it. So I am assuming that Pita had some sort of Freudian slip in identifying VL7 Light Live. Would like to know what Pita actually tested.--GrannyGeek

2. Sorry, I don't know how to use the "testing repo". I just barely understand the idea of Gslapt.

When you run Gslapt, certain repositories are available by default. To change those, you go to Edit, Preferences, Sources and enable Testing in one of the choices. In order to make sure any needed dependencies are pulled down, I always have patchespackagesextratestinggsb

enabled. gsb contains stuff from Gnome, which some non-gnome packages need. I've never investigated how much of gnome you can get through the gsb repo. When you are considering what you might want to install, the Common tab on the main screen listing available packages has a line, Source. If it lists /testing, remember that the package isn't considered tested enough to place in the usual repos. However, as I said before, packages frequently don't get a lot of testing before they are moved to the usual repos, so don't feel like a pioneer if you try one. It would help a lot if you would mention your success or problems in the "VL package news and Updates" section of the forum under the announcement of the package.

Quote

I use, with great success, XOSL. I have used XOSL with any number of Linux distros, without any difficulty. I must be doing something wrong, for I cannot reach the Vector boot sector on sda4, post installation.

I can't help at all with that because the only boot loader I've ever used is the Windows XP boot loader. I've never had a problem with it. All of my Linuxes are versions of VectorLinux. I lost interest in other distros years ago. Since VectorLinux 7 switched to the widespread Linux naming of all hard drive partitions as /dev/sdx rather than /dev/hdx, versions of VL that were installed using /dev/hdx will not boot with LILO for VL7. There is a workaround for that but I never cared enough to comprehend what I'd have to do and actually do it. I never use the older versions anyway. They are on my hard drive for historical reasons and because I occasionally need a file or library that isn't in the newer versions and I can just copy it from the previous installation.

Quote

Root Schmmoot. Who cares? do I care? NO. Absolutely not. I use my computer. No one else. It is not a server. I don't share it with anyone else. Root for me is an abstraction, an irritant.

We've been through that before. I think you *should* care because the security of your computer is at stake. I assure you that Linux isn't going to abandon root/user distinctions. Even if you use a Mac or Windows since XP, you'll find a distinction between administrator and user. So I guess if you're going to use Linux, you'll have to live with an irritant. Of course, you can run as root all the time if that's your choice. I don't recommend it but it's your machine.

>> I don't do ANYTHING, because Apple, or M$ do it that way. >>

I wasn't saying you should do anything because Microsoft or Apple do it that way. I was just pointing out that your categorical statement that desktop icons ought to respond to a single click and anything else is so '80s wasn't seen that way by Microsoft, which has done extensive redesigns of the desktop, as well as several Linux desktops. I don't know if the Mac requires double clicks. With KDE I know you have a choice of single clicks or double clicks. So if single clicks are so important to you, use KDE, not XFce. I don't know if a single click is an option with Gnome.

Quote

If Vector Linux wishes to ENABLE, obsolete technology, that is no problem, from my perspective. BUT, it is a REAL problem, if the distro requires users to behave in a manner consistent with the norms of obsolete technology.

Who made you the judge of what is or is not "obsolete technology"? PLEASE--you are entitled to strong preferences, as are we all. But our preferences are NOT the standard to which all users and all desktops and all OSes must be held. As far as having no interest in VectorLinux if you can't get a single click for launching a desktop icon, well, VL 6 SOHO with KDE does offer a single click. So maybe Standard is not for you and you'd be happier with SOHO. I doubt any of us would deny you a choice you prefer.

To change to a single click in Thunar, go to Edit, Preferences, Behavior, and select Single click to activate items. However, this applies just to Thunar, not to desktop icons. If you would like an entire XFce single click option, you should mention this to the XFce developers. If there's enough interest, I'm sure it would eventually get incorporated.--GrannyGeek